This is going to sound awfully hack/poor uni student, but it is possible to wire in a switch to the supercharger relay so to pick when it operates.
Would this cause any problems/ damage to the supercharger/engine.
Your help and guidance please.
Mat

Spaniel used to have his SC clutch hooked up to a switch in his lime green AW11 with a late model 4AGZE from a levin.  In standard config the SC is triggered by the ECU at a particular RPM (or something to that effect), it should be trivial to wire in a 3 position switch (eg. off-auto-on) into this circuit.

Panic not, it won't cause any issues for the SC, or the motor.  

poor uni student, so let me guess....... you want to do this to try and save fuel?
 
well it won't the 4agze uses just as much fuel without the SC on. the only time its reasonable to put it so you can turn of is trying to diagnose problems. alot of other people have had this same idea.
 
BUT if by on a switch meaning you want to have the SC on at all times you will find you will start burning through Superchargers in no time at all. and given the cost and rarity of them now......... Being on all the time the SC will heat up too much and start destroying the teflon rotors and bearings.

Save fuel/ not having to use 98
With out the charger I should safely be able to use 95/91, due the early model gze's low compression ratio.
The switch was originally to go from off to ecu control. But making the option for always on is also an idea.
the reason the sc gets hot under normal rod use if it is always on is because at idle the is low airflow, if there was an always on position it would only be used at the track.
 

I used to run my AW11 SC import on 95 a few times, never had an issue with it, never ran it on 91. Hell I don't even run my rav4 on 91 due to most 91 fuels these days being ethanol mixed. Haven't seen a full 91 pump since I last tripped into victorian outback HAHA.

Although I hate seeing threads go off track, it seems that this one is destined to.  I'll enter into the 91/95/98 discussion here . . .
 
The initial cost saving of filling your tank with 95 is negated by the shorter distance you get to travel.  Seriously, I've had occasio to do some fairly decent road trips recently ( Brisbane to Adelaide, Brisbane to Melbourne) in a vehicle towing a car trailer.  We've noticed that you DO get more distance out of a tank of 98 using reasonable economy driving methods.  Sorry, I can't offer any quantitative data - I don't have the figures easily on hand.
 
OK, having said that let me say this.  If all you are hoping to achieve is fuel economy then an AW can be driven without turning the fun light on, and it does extend the range noticeably.  My question for you, therefore, is why would you bother having an SC AW?  An Excell would give you just as much motoring pleasure in this mode . . .
 
or an X19 . . .

Running premium in a car than cannot accommodate the change wont change the fuel efficiency.
As for running a 4AGZE SC on a switch, don't bother unless you are doing it for electrical issues.
 
My brother drives his to work and back every day in a fair bit of traffic, gets a shade under 10L/100km.
That's pretty good
 
Wiso - Regular 91 is as common as E10 outside of NSW, due to some law we have here we are stuck with E10

Thanks for your input guys.

Using what I have learnt in the first 3 years of my Automotive engineering degree, and some choice tools from the Formula SAE team, I was able to conduct some tests, the results were.
1, sc unplugged 10L/100km
2, sc hooked up, 15L/100km.

That was enough of a result to wire in a 3 position switch, which works perfectly.
The permanently on setting will be brilliant for the track.

I also managed to do a quick lapsim of my car at Winton using the optimum g software, and although not all the parameters were 100%, apparently 1.45 odd is doable. I could deal with that.